Implementing a Palliative Care Junior Faculty Visiting Professor Program: Pearls and Pitfalls.

Jennifer B Seaman, Teresa H Thomas, Risa L Wong, David I Lazris, Maria Belin, Yael Schenker
{"title":"Implementing a Palliative Care Junior Faculty Visiting Professor Program: Pearls and Pitfalls.","authors":"Jennifer B Seaman, Teresa H Thomas, Risa L Wong, David I Lazris, Maria Belin, Yael Schenker","doi":"10.1177/10499091241244815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Motivation: </strong>Palliative Care (PC) is a small, relatively young interprofessional sub-specialty; hence mentorship for early-career research faculty is widely dispersed across schools and universities. We developed the Junior Visiting Professor Program (JVPP) to provide junior faculty in palliative care (PC) with opportunities to meet multidisciplinary PC researchers from other institutions and to advance their research through networking and presenting their work. We describe how we designed and implemented the program, and we report on the first cohort of participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We invited PC research groups from US schools of medicine and nursing to participate in this 5-year interprofessional exchange program by nominating junior faculty and serving as hosts. We matched nominees to host institutions based on nominee training experiences, nominee research interests, and host institution faculty expertise. In addition, we provided logistical guidance on visit planning. Post-visit, we surveyed both hosts and junior visiting professors (JVPs) regarding their satisfaction, perceived value, and suggestions regarding the program.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We recruited 13 schools to participate and matched 10 nominees to host institutions in our first year. Nine JVPs completed their visit; 6 JVPs and 8 host faculty/staff responded to the post-visit survey. Overall, JVPs were highly satisfied with their matches and the visiting professor experience. Hosts were generally satisfied with their matches and believed the program to be mutually beneficial. The most frequent suggestion was for greater administrative support to plan visits.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Structured, well-supported opportunities for networking across institutions is beneficial for emerging PC researchers and for building PC research capacity.</p>","PeriodicalId":94222,"journal":{"name":"The American journal of hospice & palliative care","volume":" ","pages":"80-84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American journal of hospice & palliative care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091241244815","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Motivation: Palliative Care (PC) is a small, relatively young interprofessional sub-specialty; hence mentorship for early-career research faculty is widely dispersed across schools and universities. We developed the Junior Visiting Professor Program (JVPP) to provide junior faculty in palliative care (PC) with opportunities to meet multidisciplinary PC researchers from other institutions and to advance their research through networking and presenting their work. We describe how we designed and implemented the program, and we report on the first cohort of participants.

Methods: We invited PC research groups from US schools of medicine and nursing to participate in this 5-year interprofessional exchange program by nominating junior faculty and serving as hosts. We matched nominees to host institutions based on nominee training experiences, nominee research interests, and host institution faculty expertise. In addition, we provided logistical guidance on visit planning. Post-visit, we surveyed both hosts and junior visiting professors (JVPs) regarding their satisfaction, perceived value, and suggestions regarding the program.

Results: We recruited 13 schools to participate and matched 10 nominees to host institutions in our first year. Nine JVPs completed their visit; 6 JVPs and 8 host faculty/staff responded to the post-visit survey. Overall, JVPs were highly satisfied with their matches and the visiting professor experience. Hosts were generally satisfied with their matches and believed the program to be mutually beneficial. The most frequent suggestion was for greater administrative support to plan visits.

Conclusions: Structured, well-supported opportunities for networking across institutions is beneficial for emerging PC researchers and for building PC research capacity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实施姑息关怀初级教师客座教授计划:珍珠与陷阱。
动机姑息关怀(PC)是一个规模较小、相对年轻的跨专业亚专科;因此,各学校和大学对早期研究教师的指导非常分散。我们制定了 "青年客座教授计划"(JVPP),为姑息关怀(PC)领域的青年教师提供与来自其他机构的多学科 PC 研究人员会面的机会,并通过交流和展示他们的工作来促进他们的研究。我们介绍了如何设计和实施该计划,并报告了第一批参与者的情况:方法:我们邀请美国医学院和护理学院的 PC 研究小组参与这项为期 5 年的跨专业交流计划,提名初级教师并担任接待方。我们根据被提名者的培训经历、被提名者的研究兴趣以及主办机构教师的专长,将被提名者与主办机构进行匹配。此外,我们还为访问计划提供后勤指导。访问结束后,我们对接待方和初级访问教授(JVPs)进行了调查,了解他们对项目的满意度、认知价值和建议:结果:我们招募了 13 所学校参与,并在第一年为 10 名被提名人与接待机构牵线搭桥。9 名青年学者完成了访问;6 名青年学者和 8 名接待机构的教职员工回复了访问后调查。总体而言,联合志愿人 员对他们的配对和访问教授的经历非常满意。东道主也普遍对他们的配对感到满意,并认为该项目是互惠互利的。最常见的建议是为计划访问提供更多的行政支持:有组织的、得到良好支持的跨机构交流机会有利于新兴 PC 研究人员和 PC 研究能力的建设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Knowledge and Attitude of the General Public Toward Palliative Care in Jordan: A Cross-Sectional Study. Differences in Attitudes and Barriers Towards Advance Care Planning Amongst Ischemic Heart Disease Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study. A Mixed Methods Analysis of Standardized Documentation of Serious Illness Conversations Within an Electronic Health Record Module During Hospitalization. Palliative and End-of-Life Care Interventions with Minoritized Populations in the US with Serious Illness: A Scoping Review. Exploring Palliative Care Needs Among Patients With Cancer and Non-Cancer Serious Chronic Diseases: A Comparison Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1